1 What are the new changes to the School Performance Grading Rules (Revisions made by the the State Board of Education on November 18, 2003)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Advertisements

Future Ready Schools ABCs/AYP Background Briefing August 23, 2007 Lou Fabrizio, Ph.D. Director of Accountability Services NC Department of Public.
1 IDEA 2004 SPP Indicators Related to Transition: How We Collect the Data & What We Have Learned Ginger Blalock Summer Transition Meeting June 11, 2007.
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) An Overview. Resources Policy Guidance NCLB Brochures
New Jersey Statewide Assessment Results: Highlights and Trends State Board of Education, February 6, 2008 Jay Doolan, Ed.D., Assistant Commissioner,
AYP Changes for 2007 K-20 Videoconference June 11, 2007 Presented by: JoLynn Berge OSPI Federal Policy Coordinator.
May 3, 2006WV Department of Education Annual Measurable Objectives for Improving the Achievement of LEP Students Title III AMAOs.
Title III: Continuous Improvement Update on Program Developments for LEP Students.
Alaska Accountability Adequate Yearly Progress January 2008, Updated.
Alaska Accountability Adequate Yearly Progress February 2007, Updated.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress 2005 Status Report Research, Assessment & Accountability November 2, 2005 Oakland Unified School District.
A presentation to the Board of Education
1 R-2 Report: Read and write at the end of third grade Review of Progress and Approval of Targets A presentation to the Board by Vince.
1 R-2 Report: Graduation A presentation to the Board of Education by Brad Stam, Chief Academic Officer Instructional Services Staff Research and Assessment.
1 School Grades and Adequate Yearly Progress 2004 and Beyond.
1 School Grades and Adequate Yearly Progress Changes 2005 and Beyond.
Federal Accountability Adequate Yearly Progress. TEA-USDE Flexibility Agreement
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA September 2003.
Accountabil ity System Student Achievement Index I Student Progress Index 2 Closing Performanc e Gaps Index 3 Postsecondary Readiness Index 4 Overview.
Annual Progress Report Submitted to The Iowa Department of Education by the Cedar Rapids Community School District.
2007 ITBS/ ITED Results Cedar Rapids Community Schools.
SPRING CREEK ELEMENTARY Title I For additional information contact the school at
Accountability Reporting Webinar Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Determinations & Federal NCLB Accountability Status, State Accountability & Assistance.
Understanding How the Ranking is Calculated 2011 TOP TO BOTTOM RANKING.
Third Grade Reading/Promotion A Plan for Monitoring School Districts Compliance State Board of Education February 18, 2003.
Smithtown Central School District The New York State District Report Card April 2006.
Jamesville-DeWitt School Report Card Presented to the Board of Education May 10, 2010.
Changes in Student Assessment and School Accountability A-1.
P.E.R.T. Presentation Prepared by Rita Effing, Accountability Coordinator Department of Accountability, Research, and Continuous Improvement The School.
Annual Title 1 Parent Meeting
Middle School 8 period day. Rationale Low performing academic scores on Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) - specifically in mathematics.
STATE TEST DATA SPRING 2012 Report to SSD School Board.
Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS) Report Presented to ACISD Board of Trustees 12/18/2008 ARANSAS COUNTY ISD – A TEA RECOGNIZED SCHOOL.
1 School District of Escambia County Class Size Presentation August 2010.
Data Driven Decisions Moving from 3D to D 3. Data Driven Decisions Moving from 3D to D 3 Malcolm Thomas Director, Evaluation Services Escambia School.
OPSB & RSD LEAP/GEE Scores in Context Cowen Institute for Public Education Initiatives Tulane University May 2008.
Florida School Accountability Dr. Karen Schafer Accountability and Testing Adapted from Presentation June, 2014 by Ed Croft Bureau Chief, Accountability.
AYP to AMO – 2012 ESEA Update January 20, 2013 Thank you to Nancy Katims- Edmonds School District for much of the content of this presentation Ben Gauyan.
School Grades Model and Historical Background
1 Requirements for Focus Schools Focus Schools Conference Presenter: Yvonne A. Holloman, Ph.D. September 17-18, 2012.
Changes To Florida’s School Grades Calculations Adopted By The State Board Of Education On February 28, 2012 Prepared by Research, Evaluation & Accountability.
1 Transition to FCAT 2.0, End-of-Course Assessments, and School Accountability and Beyond Dr. Karen Schafer October, 2010 Secondary Curriculum.
1 Prepared by: Research Services and Student Assessment & School Performance School Accountability in Florida: Grading Schools and Measuring Adequate Yearly.
A ccountability R esearch and M easurement 1 Overview of Proposed School Grading Formula for :
Student Assessment Literacy Project “SAL-P”. Why should you be assessment literate? It is your right to be informed and to know  on what you will be.
1 School Grades & AMO Overview Paul Houchens Director Student Assessment & Research.
Know the Rules Nancy E. Brito, NBCT, Accountability Specialist Department of Educational Data Warehouse, Accountability, and School Improvement
1 School Grades Paul Houchens Director Student Assessment & Research.
A ccountability R esearch and M easurement Florida Department of Education Accountability Research and Measurement Florida’s School Grading System Rule.
Department of Mathematics and Science Millard E. Lightburn, Ph.D. District Science Supervisor Mary Tweedy, Noreyda Casañas, Daniel Gangeri Curriculum Support.
1 Student Assessment Update Research, Evaluation & Accountability Angela Marino Coordinator Research, Evaluation & Accountability.
No Child Left Behind Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Know the Rules Division of Performance Accountability Dr. Marc Baron, Chief Nancy E. Brito, Instructional.
MEAP / MME New Cut Scores Gill Elementary February 2012.
DRE Raising Expectations for Florida’s Students FCAT 2.0 and Algebra I End of Course Levels Revised Recommendation by Florida’s Education Commissioner.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction California English Language Development Test Lily Roberts,
New Improvement Rating for Alternative School Nancy E. Brito, NBCT, Instructional Specialist, Department of Assessment, , PX47521.
Capacity Development and School Reform Accountability The School District Of Palm Beach County Adequate Yearly Progress, Differentiated Accountability.
Accountability Update School Grade Changes Dr. Karen Schafer Office of Accountability and Testing March 14, 2012.
Elmer is not C2 Ready… R U?. R U C2 Ready? 2012 FCAT/School Grade Data The Villages Elementary of Lady Lake.
Value Added Model and Evaluations: Keeping It Simple Polk County Schools – November 2015.
AAE Updates: Learning Gains February 4, 2016 Polk County School District Assessment, Accountability & Evaluation.
Value Added Model Value Added Model. New Standard for Teacher EvaluationsNew Standard for Teacher Evaluations Performance of Students. At least 50% of.
© 2014, Florida Department of Education. All Rights Reserved. Accountability Update School Grades Technical Assistance Meeting.
2011 MEAP Results Board of Education Presentation | 07 May 2012 Romeo Community Schools | Office of Curriculum and Instruction.
February 2012 State Board Ruling: School Grade Calculations
IFs and Nested IFs =IF(R3<60,”F”,”P”)
School Improvement Ratings Rule 6A , F.A.C.
English Learner Accountability Component
Kansas Leads the World in the Success of Each Student.
Presentation transcript:

1 What are the new changes to the School Performance Grading Rules (Revisions made by the the State Board of Education on November 18, 2003)

2 This Year

3 Beginning in School Year The cut-off scores for the FCAT achievement levels will NOT be increased. The state will continue to use the SAME achievement levels. NOTE: The commissioner is to annually review and make a recommendation to the State Board about when to implement the higher standards. (Revisions made by the the State Board of Education on November 18, 2003)

4 Beginning in School Year The following requirement will be REMOVED: The difference between the reading gains for the Lowest 25% of students and the reading gains for all eligible students is no more than 10% points. (Revisions made by the the State Board of Education on November 18, 2003)

5 Beginning in School Year When the number of students used to determine the reading learning gains of the lowest 25% is less than 30, the results of the 30 lowest performing students in the school will be used. (Revisions made by the the State Board of Education on November 18, 2003)

6 Beginning in School Year When a school does not contain an assessed grade level (4 th, 8 th, or 10 th ) or when fewer than 30 students are tested, the District FCAT Writing average will be used. (Revisions made by the the State Board of Education on November 18, 2003)

7 Next Year

8 Beginning in School Year (Revisions made by the the State Board of Education on November 18, 2003) All students, regardless of disability or limited English proficiency classification, with valid FCAT scores in Reading in both the current and previous year will be included in School Grading. This will apply ONLY to: - Percent tested calculation, and - Learning gains calculation

9 Beginning in School Year (Revisions made by the the State Board of Education on November 18, 2003) The expected student performance for FCAT Writing will be 3.5 points. Schools will earn one point for each percent of students who score at or above 3.5 points. NOTE: This will also apply to school year

10 In Two Years

11 Beginning in School Year (Revisions made by the the State Board of Education on November 18, 2003) The expected student performance for FCAT Writing will be 4.0 points. Schools will earn one point for each percent of students who score at or above 4.0 points.

12 Beginning in School Year (Revisions made by the the State Board of Education on November 18, 2003) Science will be added to the school performance grading system as the 4 thachieving high standards category. Schools will earn one point for each percent of students who score at or above Achievement Level 3. NOTE: The grading scale will be adjusted accordingly.

13 Department of Research, Evaluation, and Accountability Dr. Marc Baron, Executive Director Dr. Lourdes Ferrer, Assessment Specialist for Secondary Schools Nancy Brito, Instructional Specialist for Elementary Schools PX:47521